The Unlevel Arena-Sustaining Dressage as an International Competitive Sport

[Eclectic Horseman]

I too have done a lot of thinking about recent discussions on this board as well as the deliberations being undertaken at the highest level regarding judging and other matters impacting our sport.

There is no secret that for the past many decades two countries have dominated dressage. More recently, two individual riders have dominated international dressage. It seems to me that in any sport, where the competitive nature is lost, the sport ultimately suffers. This may be hard to see for those that are on top. I myself was quite a Celtics basketball fan in the years when either the Boston Celtics or the LA Lakers had a lock on the championship. But if you didn't live in Boston or LA, professional basketball was a big yawn.

In these big business sports, the powers that be realize that unless other teams have a real chance of winning-- unless the playing field is leveled-- then spectators and sponsors lose interest and revenues wane. For that reason, many devices have been introduced to level the playing fields in those sports, such as salary caps as well as drafts and lotteries for new players. In horse racing, weights are added to handicap the horses to even the odds.

In smaller individual sports, sometimes there is a country or an athlete who is dominant for many years. Sometimes these individuals are truly dominant because of their physical prowess: take bicyclist Lance Armstrong or swimmer Michael Phelps, for example. But in a relatively short time, athletes inevitably succumb to injury or old age. Not so with riders, who simply start again with a new horse and can continue on indefinitely.

If you accept the proposition that lack of competition hurts any sport, then what can be done with dressage when most countries are competing for third place at best at international competitions? Can this sustain international interest over the long term?

I am expressly NOT saying anything about the judging or about the individuals involved. For purposes of this discussion, I am assuming that they totally deserve their awards and honors without any question. The question is whether they should be "handicapped" in some way for the good of the sport.

Here is where I expect the discussion to get tricky, because there are many people for whom the current competition system IS dressage-- and for them, to make any changes is akin to defiling an art form. To be clear, I am not talking about adding spanish walk or cantering backwards as a movement in the tests. I am talking about ways of leveling the playing field to sustain international interest in dressage competitions over the long term. Such as, just to throw a few ideas out there, requiring mandatory retirement of competitors at a certain point or having a "draft" for the best horses.

What do you think? :confused:

[slc2]

The winning riders have to run alongside their horse for the first half of the test.

The winning riders have to ride a pony instead of their regular horse.

The winning riders have to ride with one hand tied behind their back.

The winning riders have to ride while holding a trio of ferrets inside their coat, that has been given four cups of espresso.

The nature of competition is that you have people who have won in the past who have an edge. As long as the halo effect isn't too big, it works.

[pluvinel]

I too have done a lot of thinking about recent discussions on this board as well as the deliberations being undertaken at the highest level regarding judging and other matters impacting our sport.

There is no secret that for the past many decades two countries have dominated dressage. More recently, two individual riders have dominated international dressage. It seems to me that in any sport, where the competitive nature is lost, the sport ultimately suffers......
.......
What do you think? :confused:

We should ask Bernie Ecclestone.....when Michael Schumacher was winning every Formula One race he entered, crowds were there to cheer or boo him....but there were crowds at the tracks. Schumacher is supposed to have made F-1 popular in Germany during the year where every race he entered he finished in the podium (1-2-3 place).

Formula One car racing is very objective....make a boo-boo, have a mechanical failure, have a brain fart and it can cost you your life....or at the very least a lot of bucks. All drivers face the same test of intensity of the course. That's the leveling of the playing field (along with cubic dollars).

The cubic dollars factor is the same to win at international dressage....the "unlevel" part is when riders come into the arena with the "halo effect" of what judges expect to see and don't judge what is being ridden in front of them.

[Petstorejunkie]

The winning riders have to ride while holding a Jack Russell Terrier on their lap that has been given four cups of espresso.

The winning riders have to drink a Big Gulp sized cup of gin 30 min before they get on.
I think combining these too is the handicap we are looking for :lol:

Seriously, it's like saying the indy winners need to drive volkswagon beetles instead as a "handicap"

[J-Lu]

Well, these are my thoughts:

I have followed dressage for a long time, including Isabell and Anky's careers. I don't believe that the sport is lacking competition. To the contrary, I believe we are living in an unprecidented time when two *exceptionally* gifted riders are training and showing dressage. Similarly, we lived in unprecidented times with Lance Armstrong...who won, what, a record 7 Tour de Frances? What would you want them to do? Quit? I believe that over the years they are in large part responsible for raising the bar of international dressage. I give them alot of credit for their talents and contribution to the sport. Are they gods? No. But they are exceptional riders. Supremely exceptional. Why on earth would we want them to stop riding. Dressage in *America* may not be as exciting, but you can be sure that dressage in Holland and Germany has benefitted phenomenally from these riders. If they rode for the US, I think we would be changing our tune.

Following the market, of course, these *exceptionally* gifted riders end up with *exceptionally gifted* horses to ride. If I had a great horse and alot of money, I'd be honored if either took the ride. I would believe that my horse was being ridden to its potential. And if I were a sponsor, I'd want my logo on them. But that said, our American riders have really nice sponsorship, too. They pay for basically NOTHING, get to write all horse expenses off, and net more $$ at the end of the year than you do.

Dressage doesn't have nearly the support and sheer tradition in America as it does in Germany and Holland. Indeed, virtually all of our International dressage horses are imports from these countries or are directly descended from imports. Our top riders go to Europe to train. Or came from Europe and live in America. I have no problem acknowledging that these countries excel in this sport and have worked hard for decades/centuries to be at the top of the sport. in this respect, the analogy of dressage and show jumping departs from basketball and other american sports. I mean, America is the breeder of exported reining quarter horses par excellance... Because that is our tradition. THAT is our real native niche in breeding, in my opinion.

America, on European born riders (steffen P, Gunther S, Christine T, etc.)and european trained riders (virtually everyone) and on European bred/trained horses (0-1 generation) have quite often risen to third place/bronze medal against countries with a DEEP tradition in the sport and have bested countries such as Denmark, Sweden, England, and other countries with a longer tradition of dressage than us. Why we can't be thrilled with this and the growth of dressage in America escapes me. Just sas in the Olympics, America can't EXPECT to get a medal in cross country skiing, skiing long jump, track competions (sans steroids) just because we desire it. Countries with a history in these events desire it, too, and we have alot to learn about WHY and HOW they are at the top of their sport.

In my opinion, you cannot retire great competitors because they are great. That would mean retiring Tiger Woods, Lance Armstrong, Michael Phelps, Roger Federer, Laura Wilkinson and other exceptional yet "old" athletes. Also, you cannot "draft" exceptional horses. If I bred or paid 6-7 figures to buy an exceptional horse and around 200K per year to campaign it full speed, I would want an exceptional rider to ride it. lets not forget that some select exceptional riders, such as Debbie, isabell, Anky, etc. start younger horses while other "exceptional" riders take only FEI-bound upper level horses. Not everyone would have taken a Salinero, a Warum Nicht, a Ravell, a Rusty as a four year old. Heck, Rusty was an auction horse listed as "unknown breeding" until he was upper FEI. Heck, i don't think Isabell could ride Anky's horses as well as Anky, and I don't think Anky could ride Isabell's horses as well as Isabell.

"The good of the sport" at the top levels is very tricky, in my opinon, because quite often "the good of the sport" is equated to fame and fortune and status and sponsorship and revenue from investment..not necessarily abou creating harmony between horse and rider.

My two cents.

[Fixerupper]

Whether it works (or not...) I think that is what the 'ad hoc' dressage committee was created to address. Theoretically one option may be to 'handicap' successful competitors....but re-working the judging system is possibly a better option.

No matter what (if any) 'new' system is adopted, dressage is, undeniably, an 'opinion judged' sport, unlike show jumping, car racing or golf.

However, I think it is important to remember that the sport of dressage got into the present situation because the FEI (in particular, though not alone) allowed a very small group of individuals, with an agenda, to virtually control(l) the direction of the sport for many years. I am certain that the 'very small group of individuals' had a vision that they believed was the right thing for the sport....

Be that as it may...in the big picture....dressage, at the top, is a pretty small world, so we may just be changing one set of biases for another.

However one can live in hope.... 'It's been a long, a long time coming. But I know (hope) a change gonna come'.

;)

[Eclectic Horseman]

Well, these are my thoughts:

"The good of the sport" at the top levels is very tricky, in my opinon, because quite often "the good of the sport" is equated to fame and fortune and status and sponsorship and revenue from investment..not necessarily abou creating harmony between horse and rider.


But we are talking about a competitive sport. In other words, "it's only a game." The rules can be changed however we see fit. "The good of the sport" the way that I define it is first of all to keep the sport alive internationally. I am sure that the sports of curling and bocce are quite satisfying for those who participate in them, but they do not attract an international following to any degree, and do not have many spectators or sponsors.

Competition is not necessarily about creating harmony between horse and rider. That would be an exhibition, of the sort done at the SRS. In fact, many have decried what competition has done to the equestrian arts: freaklishly gaited horses, tail wringing, rollkur, hotter and hotter horses exploding during competition, etc. So get off that. :rolleyes:

I'm just throwing this out here for discussion. Mock if you like. But where do you think dressage will be in 20 years if it is still Germany vs. Holland and Anky vs. Isabell? Are we headed in the right direction?

Just throwing it out there to think about. I haven't drawn any conclusions myself.

[cyberbay]

Well, also, on another level.... all things pass. Anky and Isabell will pass... Isabell (whose horsemanship and riding I seem to appreciate more than Anky's) is a rider I watch to see how she's riding, and what she's managing with her horse. I see human frailty there, as her rides, her riding as glorious as it is, don't see to be the slamdunk that Anky's with the judges seem to be.

So, I would be sorry to see her step away from active competition. Anky is Hollywood, to me, and I watch her for different reasons. I think a lot of sports is about the human cosmic struggle, where the determination, the hopefulness, the 'one more time' are being watched.

To me, that's sports. And if we want dressage to make our sports configuration here in the US to be known as the Big Five (!!), expanding the outlook beyond win or lose or unfair would make the sport more universal.

You know, the elites in any sport are always in an uproar about who's winning and why. I think that that is part and parcel of any elite competitive sport... Fine by me. Elite competitors are not 'regular' people. Talk about driven!!

[coloredhorse]

The winning riders have to ride while holding a trio of ferrets inside their coat, that has been given four cups of espresso.

slc, I'm seeing a whole new horse sport: mounted ferret legging. (For unmounted ferret legging, see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPQ6TuvqX7w.)